PhilW wrote:I see no problem with this, but also little likelihood of use.

This seems to be the consensus.

I like a PDF to have a route home, so that if it appears on another website, as they do, a user has a pointer back to whence it came. A link to just the review thread, or even the planning thread, suffices for that. So the full set of TN threads is a little work (even though only a little) for less gain.

As the 1975 horizontal was ending, Tom was calculating the damage. Some people had brought Port, most hadn’t, and there was the cost of the food. Tom looked up from his scribbling and asked that, to help do this, there be an accounting page.

jdaw1 wrote:As the 1975 horizontal was ending, Tom was calculating the damage. Some people had brought Port, most hadn’t, and there was the cost of the food. Tom looked up from his scribbling and asked that, to help do this, there be an accounting page.

Sure. But what should it be?

Something like this perhaps.

Picture1s.jpg (30.44 KiB) Viewed 7213 times

The bottles contribution line is completed at the start of the evening, a per person average computed (in this case 41.50), and this is also completed in the bottle cost line. Once the bill arrives, the meal cost per person is completed. Finally the calculation is made column by column for who owes/is owed.

In the voting sheets, there is one column per name (example on right). This arrangement was chosen partly because, happily, we typically have more wines than people. This is the same arrangement as Mike’s spreadsheet.

But the Accounting page has only a few fields per name, so it seems more natural to have one name per row rather than one name per column, which is the transpose of Mike’s spreadsheet. Objections?

AccountingTopText: must be a parameter to allow non-English possibilities.

AccountingColumnTitles: In the instance in which a group of columns has only one column, the group’s column title should be short: hence “Bestowals” rather than “Contributions”. Do suggest better. Also, should there be a few columns with blank titles? If so, within the groups already present, or in a new blank group?

AccountingColumnRelativeWidths: allows “P’d?” column to ne narrow, holding no more than a tick.

AccountingExtraRows: extra rows under those of the names, to cope with extra people, sub-calculations, changes of mind, &c.

jdaw1 wrote:As the 1975 horizontal was ending, Tom was calculating the damage. Some people had brought Port, most hadn’t, and there was the cost of the food. Tom looked up from his scribbling and asked that, to help do this, there be an accounting page.

Sure. But what should it be?

I would suggest it should not be. Several reasons:
- During a tasting is not the best time to do the calculation (note the accuracy of voting summations).
- This is only really relevant for larger tastings where either a large amount of wine comes from a subset of the individuals, or there is significant disparity due to some bringing much older wines. In previous tastings (at least some of those I have organised) some people have been very generous in providing their (significant) contribution either as "if this covers me, I don't want anything more for it" or at very low cost. Such gentlemanly behaviour is appreciated and should not be discouraged (and yes I think group analysis might do so).
- Given such variations, a spreadsheet is more reliable.
- During a tasting is not the best time to do the calculation (I know, I said it already, but it's the most important reason).

jdaw1 wrote:As the 1975 horizontal was ending, Tom was calculating the damage. Some people had brought Port, most hadn’t, and there was the cost of the food. Tom looked up from his scribbling and asked that, to help do this, there be an accounting page.

Sure. But what should it be?

I would suggest it should not be. Several reasons:
- During a tasting is not the best time to do the calculation (note the accuracy of voting summations).
- This is only really relevant for larger tastings where either a large amount of wine comes from a subset of the individuals, or there is significant disparity due to some bringing much older wines. In previous tastings (at least some of those I have organised) some people have been very generous in providing their (significant) contribution either as "if this covers me, I don't want anything more for it" or at very low cost. Such gentlemanly behaviour is appreciated and should not be discouraged (and yes I think group analysis might do so).
- Given such variations, a spreadsheet is more reliable.
- During a tasting is not the best time to do the calculation (I know, I said it already, but it's the most important reason).

I'm not sure it's such a bad thing. I agree this is only really relevant for the bigger tastings with an imbalance in bottle provision - the sheet can be an optional, like many others in the software. It is true that attempting the calculations during, or at the end of the tasting could lead to error, however that is not caused by having a sheet available. It happens because 13 or 14 people are standing around with cash/cards in their hand trying to be helpful and make a fair contribution. Sheet or no sheet, Tom found himself needing to undertake difficult maths at a less that ideal time - the sheet could only have helped I believe! And there is nothing to stop gentlemanly contribution continuing, which is always appreciated

If one has all the numbers to hand in advance, then a computation at a sober moment is preferable, but that's only possible at a minority of events - the food bill is usually variable, and late additions and deletions to the wine list are not uncommon.

A simple computation sheet would therefore assist..

I may be drunk, Miss, but in the morning I shall be sober and you will still be ugly - W.S. Churchill

Experience tells me that shared costs should be calculated, notified and settled in advance of large structured tastings. If people then decide to bring extras or not show up that is their choice. Ideally the bottles should also be collected in advance to eliminate the problem of late withdrawals or no shows on the day.

PhilW wrote:… not the best time to do the calculation …
… a spreadsheet is more reliable…

DRT wrote:… should …

I agree with both of you.

flash_uk wrote:… optional…
… Sheet or no sheet, Tom found himself needing to undertake difficult maths at a less that ideal time - the sheet could only have helped …

uncle tom wrote:If one has all the numbers to hand in advance, then a computation at a sober moment is preferable, but that's only possible at a minority of events - the food bill is usually variable, and late additions and deletions to the wine list are not uncommon.

A simple computation sheet would therefore assist..

I agree that this is alien to Planet Should, and really belongs on Asteroid Helpful. Which is a yes, partly grudging. Would it be sensible for the default to be that it appears if the length of Names is ≥7?

DRT wrote:"I'll sort it out on the night" could become the normal behaviour.

Why the conditional mood? With very few exceptions†, we do attempt to “sort it out on the night”. It has been suggested that if the Accounting page exists, we would attempt it neither more nor less often — i.e., it would remain “the normal behaviour” — but might be done more accurately.

Do you agree with these assertions?

† So far this year, I recall only the 1985 horizontal in which finances were computed in advance. And even those were altered on the night.

Admittedly, I have not been to many tastings recently. Normal behaviour for this part of the organisation appears to have changed. As I am unlikely to organise a major tasting in the foreseeable future my view on the matter is of little or no significance.

How many glasses can sensibly go on one sheet of /USL2 = US Ledger = 17″×11″? This has been discussed on . As a test Eric Menchen printed this test PDF (which has pages of 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 20, and 21 glasses), and has posted photographs of glasses on these 17″×11″ pages. Answer: sixteen.

jdaw1 wrote:How many glasses can sensibly go on one sheet of /USL2 = US Ledger = 17″×11″? This has been discussed on . As a test Eric Menchen printed this test PDF (which has pages of 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 20, and 21 glasses), and has posted photographs of glasses on these 17″×11″ pages. Answer: sixteen.